User talk:71.107.173.86

November 2007

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User talk:Gavin.collins. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —slakr^\ talk / 04:43, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Fuse (emulator)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Fuse (emulator), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Fuse (emulator). Gavin Collins (talk) 07:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Do not remove templates without discussion. I have reverted all your edits. ZacBowling ^(user|talk) 08:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Spebi 08:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

71.107.173.86 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was reverting an asshole who was vandalizing articles.

Decline reason:

The "stupid dumbfuck"s you reverted weren't vandalising any article at all, merely adding the necessary tags, which you removed for no apparent reason. I don't see any rationale for unblocking here. Spebi 08:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.